Problem 1237. It's race time! Write a faster function than the test suite call of unique().
I'm sure some smarter person will find a faster method!
My solution passed on the third try; there's definitely some CPU timing mismatch going on!
Agreed, some of my solutions passed only part of the time.
Hi, just wondering whether someone could help me out here. I was expanding the testset, and I was trying x = [1:10 2:11] but I got an error "Error: Dimensions of matrices being concatenated are not consistent." I then tried x = [1 2 3 4], and x = 1:4; but got the same error. On my version of MATLAB all these statements work perfectly and I believe they are basic MATLAB syntax. x = [1; 2; 3; 4] worked fine however. In the end I had to transpose the matrices.
it even cannot pass on my own computer, but....
Jeremy, please increase the size of the third case. Performance tests are not made with small samples (unless they are run several times)...because many other factors may affect the time (alternating processes, server overload, memory usage, etc). A regular CPU is always multi-tasking.
About your problem with arrays, try adding a comma between lists.
My code did well for large samples, but I am sorry for the last test case. The sample is too small for performance tests, and not even using a lookup table was as fast as unique.
It was too tempting...
I thought I was being original by trying this. Guess not... :-(
Clever :), hadn't thought of that!
Problem Recent Solvers30
Read a column of numbers and interpolate missing data
Back to basics 19 - character types
Multiples of a Number in a Given Range
More from this Author7
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!Start Hunting!